SHEARERS’ DISPUTE

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXXI, Issue 18792, 30 May 1923, Page 5

SHEARERS’ DISPUTE

♦—. DISCUSSION BY CONCILIATION COUNCIL i TO GO TO THE ARBITRATION COURT [Per Press Association.] WELLINGTON, May 29. The shearers’ dispute came before the Conciliation Commissioner (Mr. W. Newton) this morning. The dispute covered the Wellington industrial district. Claims and counterclaims have been previously published. The assessors for the employers were Messrs W. Cecil Prime (Napier) and H. Morrison (Greytown), assisted by P S. McDonald and D. Henbenton. The union representatives were J. Donnelly (Greytown), T. Dillon and J. Smith (Masterton I. and C. Grayndler. Mr Newton, in opening proceedings, said the parties had met previously, and reached a complete agreement, it He hoped the same decision would e be reached on this occasion in spite it of anything that had been indicated u to the contrary. Mr. Prime said the b claims in many respects constituted j a departure from previous awards, lg and they would like to hear Mr. ’ Grayndler's remarks on the position. ■ Dealing with the position gener ally, Mr. Grayndler said the employ- ' ers wanted conditions to remain as 1 they were thirty years ago. The e main question was a demand for <1 S/- more per hundred. The sheep<l owners desired to keep prices down and looked upon the shearers as the f- only means of reducing costs. He s suggested that the employers should •. make an offer substantial!}’ in advance of the present rates, and the union would consider them. When the last award was made, the price of wool was bad, but immediately afterwards prices obtained for wool increased considerably. Sheepowners had experienced a very good year, and it was up to them to recoup the 1. shearers for the two bad years they had experienced. Denial that the rates were reduced by the Arbitration Court in view of the state of the industry when the last award was made, was voiced by Mr. Prime. He said a memorandum to the award c showed that rates were reduced for n other reasons. Mr. Grayndler was ; e not prepared to budge unless an offer 1S was made which they would consider. *■ It the employers offered to meet the g union half-way the union could say they wanted a shilling more, and -t then go to the Court and say what d had been offered. Mr. Grayndler’s argument had presented no new features on the arguments of the past two years, and on which the award v had been based. o Mr. Grayndler. replying, said the last award was rushed through just 4 on the opening of the shearing season, and the union had no chance of properly preparing its case. Mr. Prime: "You had three months from the time citations were issued.” The opinion that shearers would get a better deal from the Court this year was expressed by Mr. >rayndler. e General discussion proceeded . throughout the morning. „ Mr. Grayndler said he would per- * sonally prefer to see the dispute go to the Court, where it would last for 0 a month in various centres, as he would get an opportunity to justify himself and the officials in the eyes of the shearers, who were dissatisfied with the starvation wages received. A number of min/r agreements were put in. but it was obvious there was little prospect of an agreement on the main clauses. Mr. Morrison said they had their instructions and could not jhift from them. j Mr. Grayndler: “Well, we were r prepared to consider an offer. Why , did you not say that in the first ’ place, and we would have gone j home?” t Mr. Donnelly suggested that the . Sheepowners’ Federation should ’ withdraw restrictions on members. 3 Mr. Prime denied that there was j restriction on Federation members. Mr. Grayndler said farmers were advised not to pay more than award rates. Mr. Morrison said members might have asked for advice and been told they could not be compelled to pay more than award rates. Mr. Donnelly said throughout one district allowances and fares one way had been withdrawn. Indication was that there was concerted e notion. In reply to a question, Mr. Don--1 nelly said he might be prepared to ’ come down to the sheepowr.ers’ 1 offer if the minimum restrictioh was ■ removed. Few sheepowners would I ’ be mean enough to adhere to the r minimum. Mr. Prime definitely announced 5 that they were not prepared to shift " from their offer. 0 Proceedings then terminated, and the matter will go to the Arbitration Court.